|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 21 to 40 of 1346 Records
-
2021 (1) TMI 1330
Seeking ad-interim stay on the operation of impugned order - Legality of the eviction notices issued under section 8(4) of the PMLA, 2002 - HELD THAT:- The orders of ad-interim 'status quo', with respect to the mentioned properties except Agriculture Land - ½ share in Khasra No. 782, Rakba 0.50 Hectare at Village - Katkad, Tehsil - Hindon City, Dist. - Karuali and 22 plots bearing Plot nos. 29 to 38, 69 to 80 at Aryan City, Phase - I Scheme, Muhana, developed by the Rajhans Society Each Area, is granted subject to the following conditions:-
i. Attachments shall continue.
ii. The appellants are prohibited to create any third party right, transfer, mortgage or otherwise dispose of the properties in question in any manner.
iii. Neither party is allowed to alter the nature and character of the properties in question, as on today.
iv. No encumbrance shall be created by the appellants in respect of the properties in question.
List the appeals on 27th April, 2021.
-
2021 (1) TMI 1329
Estimation of the income of the assessee after rejection of books of account and by adopting the NP rate at 7.25% - assessee contended that NP for the preceding years i.e. AYs 2007-08 and 2008-09 cannot be considered as a proper basis for estimation of income for the year under consideration due to the reason that there are extra item of expenditure and one of them is an extra-ordinary item for these two years which has resulted declined in NP ratio - HELD THAT:- As considering the average NP declared by the assessee for the preceding year as well as extra item of expenditure for these two years and one of which is an extra-ordinary item even the NP declared by the assessee in past without considering the extra-ordinary item of the expenditure for the year cannot be taken as a comparative rate for estimation of income of the assessee.
Once the assessee sought to produce the supporting evidence to show that there are the demurrage charges which is an extra-ordinary item the CIT(A) ought to have examined this issue whether these are revenue item or capital in nature so as to give the finding that these expenditure on account of royalty payment and demurrage are relevant for estimating the NP of assessee after rejection of books of account.
As regards the contention of the DR that after estimation of income by adopting NP no further claim of deduction is allowable, we find that there is no quarrel on that point as held by the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the cases relied upon by the ld. DR. Thus, after rejection of books of account the income of the assessee has to be estimated on some reasonable basis. Once the NP is taken as the basis for estimation of the income the claim of the expenditure become irrelevant.
When it is apparent from the record that there are extra ordinary items of expenditure/business loss during the year under consideration then the estimation of income should be based on a criteria taken after due consideration of such extra-ordinary item. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, we recall the impugned order of the Tribunal for fresh adjudication and direct the Registry to fix the appeals for hearing on 25.02.2021. The notice of hearing be issued to the parties. Decided in favour of assessee.
-
2021 (1) TMI 1328
Money Laundering - physical possession over the agricultural lands - direction to maintain the 'status quo' with respect to all the immovable properties of the appellants/applicants involved in the present appeals - HELD THAT:- Respondent seeks four weeks time to file the replies to the applications, which is not objected by the learned counsel for the appellants/applicants. Let the same be filed within four weeks with advance copies to be served on the other side.
List the matters on 26th April, 2021.
-
2021 (1) TMI 1327
Money Laundering - application u/s 35 of the PMLA has been filed seeking ex parte ad interim stay of the impugned order dated 1-1-2021 and an order of status quo and/or an order directing the respondent no. 1 that no coercive steps be taken pursuant to the notice dated 7-1-2021 issued by the respondent No. 1 - section 26 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 - HELD THAT:- It is an admitted fact that the property in question is purchased and in possession of the appellant even though lying vacant. It is also an admitted fact that the property is hypothecated to IBHFL and further as per the submission of the respondent no. 1 the property is also mortgaged to IDBI. In the circumstances, it would be proper on the part of both the parties to maintain status quo till the next date of hearing. The order of status quo is subject to conditions imposed.
The respondent no. 1 is granted six weeks time to file the reply to the stay application with an advance copy to be served on the other side - The appellant has sent an email dated 26-1-2021 with one attachment regarding inspection of O.C. no. 1329/2020 carried out on 12-1-2021. The appellant is directed to supply the copy of the same to the respondent/its counsel.
List the appeal and application on 26th April, 2021.
-
2021 (1) TMI 1326
Violation of status quo order by respondent (ED) regarding possession of properties - Order XXXIX rule 2(A) CPC read with section 151 CPC - HELD THAT:- On the last date i.e. on 14-12-2020 the respondent (ED) categorically submitted that they have already taken possession of all the properties except the two properties specifically mentioned in the said order. There were certain observations in the order made by this Tribunal.
The issue of impugned notices dated 12-1-2021 does not violate the order of this Tribunal, therefore, the applications have no merit and accordingly dismissed.
-
2021 (1) TMI 1325
Challenge to cognizance/summoning order - failure to apply judicial mind on a printed format - violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT:- In the explanation given by the concerned Magistrate, it has been submitted that due to huge work-load and by mistake, he/she passed the cognizance/summoning order on a printed proforma for which he/she has tendered his unconditional apology.
The explanation given by the concerned Magistrate is not acceptable because if a Judge makes such a mistake, then from where will the general public get fair justice. A Judge acts like a God, he/she should not make mistakes due to haste or excess of work. How will a normal man get justice when a judge makes a mistake because of the excess of his/her work? At the present time, only from the temple of justice like Courts, everyone hopes for right and fair justice.
However, it would not be in the interest of justice to proceed further against the concerned Magistrate, keeping the present application pending. Therefore, this Court warns the concerned Judicial Magistrate to remain more careful and cautious in future while passing any judicial orders. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra shall ensure that such orders on a printed proforma are not passed by any judicial officers of Judgeship Agra.
It is an admitted position that the cognizance/summoning order dated 25.08.2020 has been passed without application of mind on a printed format. Such summoning orders passed on a printed proforma has already been set aside by this Court while passing a detailed order - the cognizance/summoning order dated 25.08.2020 is set aside. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra after perusing the entire records shall pass a fresh speaking and reasoned order, in accordance with law, preferably within two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.
This application stands allowed.
-
2021 (1) TMI 1324
Eligibility to Deduction u/s 80IB(10) - HELD THAT:- The appeal was admitted by a Bench of this Court vide order [2014 (12) TMI 1324 - ITAT BANGALORE] on the following substantial question of law:
"Whether or the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in holding that assessee is entitled for deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the I.T. Act even when the assessee has not satisfied the requirements of the said provision?"
Income recognition - The following additional substantial question of law was framed by order dated 07.01.2021 [2021 (1) TMI 789 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT]
"Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that 'Project Completion Method' adopted by assessee requires to be accepted as against 'Percentage Cempletion Method' applied by assessing authority by relying upon its earlier decision in case of assessee which has been challenged before this Hon'ble Court and when assessing authority rightly — recognized income for purpose of tax by holding that advances are received by assessee as and when constructions progresses resulting in profit to assessee?"
For the reasons assigned by us in [2021 (1) TMI 789 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] passed today, this appeal stands dismissed.
-
2021 (1) TMI 1323
Appeal dismissed solely on the ground of not being able to keep alive the Bank Guarantee - a long period of almost 11 years had already elapsed, from the date of the Hon’ble High Court’s Order, for no fault of the appellant - HELD THAT:- The appellant had kept the bank guarantee alive from the year 2010 to 2016. However, the appeal was not taken up for disposal in terms of the directions issued by the learned Writ Court and it is stated that the appeal was listed for haring after a period of almost 11 years. In the interregnum the financials of the appellant company had grossly dwindled and since there was an uncertainty as to when the appeal will be taken up for hearing, it appears that the appellant did not renew the bank guarantee beyond 2016. When the appeal was taken up after 11 years by the learned Tribunal, the same has been dismissed by the impugned order solely on the ground that the appellant did not comply with the order passed by the learned Writ Court directing furnishing of a bank guarantee and keep the same to be alive. To be noted that in the writ petition there were twin directions given by the learned Writ Court and the second of which was directing the learned Tribunal to dispose of the writ petition within a period of six months. This direction has not been complied with.
The order passed by the learned Writ Court was in the nature of an interim order till the appeal is heard and disposed of so as to give a protection to the appellant from recovery of the balance amount of service tax. Therefore, the appeal ought to be decided on merits and in accordance with law and cannot be dismissed on the grounds stated by the learned Tribunal.
The appeal is allowed and the order passed by the learned Tribunal is set aside and the appeal and the cross-appeal are restored to the file of the learned Tribunal to be heard and decided on merits and in accordance with law.
-
2021 (1) TMI 1322
Contributions to the assets of the Corporate Debtor equivalent to the sums as stated in this application, in respect of benefits wrongfully availed by from the Corporate Debtor - recovery/ restoration of legitimate amounts due to the Corporate Debtor in terms of Section 67 of IBC - intimation to IBBI for initiating a complaint to the Special Court in terms of Section 236(2) of the Code - imposition of fine under section 70 and 71 of the Code.
HELD THAT:- The Bench is aware that section 66 (1) of IBC imposes a liability on any person who knowingly becomes party in carrying out the business with a dishonest intent to defraud the creditors have to make a contribution to the assets of the Company. Therefore, the Bench is of the considered view that the R1 i.e Baiju Trading investment Private Limited who is the principal beneficiary of this fraudulent transaction has to return at least Rs. 41.03 crores into the account of Corporate Debtor Company. The Bench is also of the view that R2 and R3 are the suspended directors of the Corporate Debtor company and are covered under section 66 (2) of the IBC with respect to their misconduct which makes them liable to make such contribution to the assets of the Corporate Debtor company.
The Bench concludes that it is clear from the above that R1 is fairly covered under provisions of section 66 (1) and R2 and R3 are covered under section 66(2)(a) and 66(2)(b) of the Code. Since, the R1 is the principal beneficiary of this transaction and has clearly admitted to the dues owned to the Corporate Debtor, the Bench directs that an amount of Rs. 41.03 crore be remitted back by R1 into the bank account of the Corporate Debtor company within 7 days from the pronouncement of this order.
Application allowed.
-
2021 (1) TMI 1321
Maintainability of petition - availability of alternative remedy - Legality of entire proceedings of the respondents including E-Auction Sale Notice dated 29.12.2020, fixing the date of auction of petition schedule properties as 03.02.2021 under the provisions of SARFAESI Act - petitioner has not disputed that the petitioner has alternative remedy against the impugned proceedings and that no extraordinary circumstances are shown by petitioner for entertaining the present writ petition.
HELD THAT:- The Writ Petition is disposed of, granting liberty to the petitioner to avail alternative remedy available to it.
-
2021 (1) TMI 1320
Criminal breach of trust - criminal breach of trust by carrier - forgery for purpose of cheating - fraudulent cancellation, destruction etc., of will, authority to adopt or valuable security - falsification of accounts - presumption of innocence in favour of respondents or not - acquittal of accused - HELD THAT:- There are nothing palpably wrong, manifestly erroneous or demonstrably unsustainable in the impugned judgment. From the evidence available on record, there is nothing to substantiate the charge levelled against accused.
There is an acquittal and therefore, there is double presumption in favour of accused. Firstly, the presumption of innocence available to accused under the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that every person shall be presumed to be innocent unless he is proved guilty by a competent court of law. Secondly, accused having secured acquittal, the presumption of their innocence is further reinforced, reaffirmed and strengthened by the Trial Court. For acquitting accused, the Trial Court observed that the prosecution had failed to prove its case.
The opinion of the Trial Court cannot be held to be illegal or improper or contrary to law. The order of acquittal cannot be interfered with - there are no fault with the judgment of the Trial Court - appeal dismissed.
-
2021 (1) TMI 1319
Money Laundering - scheduled offences - recording of ECIR as a prosecution exhibit - objection by the defence on the ground that the said document was not the original but a photocopy and insisted on marking of the original - HELD THAT:- Suo motu FIRs are normally registered by the police in white-collar offences where the date and timings in the FIR have least significance. The Enforcement Directorate is not conducting an investigation under Chapter XII of the Cr.P.C., but, on the strength of the powers of search, seizure, recording of statements and arrest, conferred on them by various provisions of the PML Act - A person cannot be convicted or acquitted based on the entries in the ECIR form, because, an offence under the PML Act has to be proved by examining witnesses and proving documents in order to establish that the accused had involved himself in a criminal activity, acquired assets and had projected the proceeds of the crime as untainted property. In this scheme of things, the ECIR document really has no significance.
The Special Public Prosecutor placed strong reliance on Section 294 Cr.P.C. to justify his request to the trial Court for marking an office copy of the ECIR form - The Special Public Prosecutor could have obtained the original of the ECIR form from the Adjudicating Authority in New Delhi either by sending a letter to him or filing a petition under Section 91 Cr.P.C. Instead of guiding the Court properly, he has relied upon "a non-existent provision', viz. Section 300 C.R.P."
In the worst scenario, where, the ECIR form itself is not marked during trial, that by itself, will not vitiate the trial, for the simple reason that, the objective satisfaction arrived at and recorded in the ECIR form by the Enforcement Officer that an investigation under the PML Act has to be commenced based on the knowledge acquired by him that the police have registered a case for a 'schedule offence', can, by no stretch of imagination, either lead to the proof of guilt or otherwise of the person prosecuted under the PML Act. Conviction or acquittal of an accused under the PML Act, can be based only on substantive evidence and not on the mere objective satisfaction arrived at and recorded by the Enforcement Officer in the ECIR form - an ECIR form is only an opinion of the Enforcement Officer based on the case registered for a 'schedule offence' that an investigation under the PML Act should be commenced. The melancholic part in criminal justice system is that, it is often found one blind leading another and the two finally ending up in a cul-de-sac.
The impugned order is set aside and the trial Court is directed to permit the prosecution to mark the copy of the ECIR form recording the objections of the defence - this criminal revision is allowed.
-
2021 (1) TMI 1318
Parallel proceedings - Seeking grant of bail - Recovery of tax - evasion of tax by not disclosing the details of the transactions - failure to disclose true liability to pay the tax - whether the applicant can be simultaneously prosecuted under the provisions of the VAT Act as well as for the offences punishable under the Indian Penal Code? - HELD THAT:- The issue is no longer res integra. One need only refer to the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of STATE OF WEST BENGAL VERSUS NARAYAN K. PATODIA [2000 (4) TMI 777 - SUPREME COURT] and the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of G.S. OILS LTD. THROUGH ITS M.D. SHRI MANOJ KUMAR SHRIGOVIND AGRAWAL AND ANOTHER VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH PSO WANI, DIST. YAVATMAL AND OTHERS AND (UMESHKUMAR NARAYANLAL AGRAWAL VERSUS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THROUGH PSO WANI [2012 (10) TMI 1274 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] where it was held that there could be a prosecution under both the VAT Act as well as the Indian Penal Code.
As far as the ingredients of offence punishable under Section 406 and 409 of the Indian Penal Code are concerned conceptually, a dealer like the applicant would act as an agent of the Government for recovering the tax and depositing it with the latter. It would thus tantamount to creating a relationship of a principal and an agent between the Government and the dealer. If the dealer is supposed to recover the tax it would come with a consequential liability to credit it to the Government - it is in this manner prima facie the applicant can be said to be entrusted with the money which he was liable to pay to the Government but has failed to do so.
The period for which he failed to deposit the VAT and the enormity of the amount is sufficient to disentitle him of any protection in the form of anticipatory bail - bail application dismissed.
-
2021 (1) TMI 1317
Taxability of unincorporated associates - principle of mutuality - Applicability of decision in the case of STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS. VERSUS CALCUTTA CLUB LIMITED AND CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE & ORS. VERSUS M/S. RANCHI CLUB LTD. [2019 (10) TMI 160 - SUPREME COURT] - HELD THAT:- The impugned order is dated 27.06.2019, whereas the judgment of the Supreme Court is dated 03.10.2019 and the Officer did not thus have occasion to take note of the same.
Hence impugned order of assessment dated 27.06.2019 is set aside and the matter remitted to the file of the Assessing Authority to re-done in the light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Calcutta Club Limited.
The writ petition is disposed off.
-
2021 (1) TMI 1316
Prayer for a mandamus directing the respondent to correct GSTR statements - HELD THAT:- This request ought to have been made first before the respondent, instead of which the petitioner has directly approached this Court. Thus, this writ petition is pre-mature. The petitioner is permitted to file a representation seeking the same relief as sought here and pursue the same.
Writ petition is dismissed.
-
2021 (1) TMI 1315
Claim of interim maintenance under Section 23 of the Domestic Violence Act - HELD THAT:- The scope of interference in a revision petition is extremely narrow. It is well settled that Section 397 CrPC gives the High Courts or the Sessions Courts jurisdiction to consider the correctness, legality or propriety of any finding inter se an order and as to the regularity of the proceedings of any inferior court. It is also well settled that while considering the legality, propriety or correctness of a finding or a conclusion, normally the revising court does not dwell at length upon the facts and evidence of the case. A court in revision considers the material only to satisfy itself about the legality and propriety of the findings, sentence and order and refrains from substituting its own conclusion on an elaborate consideration of evidence.
The object of Section 397 CrPC is to settle a patent defect or an error in exercising jurisdiction or if the order is perverse and no court would come to such a conclusion. The orders have been passed in an application for interim maintenance under the Domestic Violence Act. Matrimonial proceedings are still pending between the parties. The findings of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate as upheld by the learned Sessions Court is that the petitioner was not providing adequate maintenance to the respondent and since the adequate maintenance was not being paid, the petitioner was directed to pay a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- towards maintenance.
The Company which was being run by the petitioner did not release her salary. The respondent had to move the court and fight for getting her legitimate salary. It is not in dispute that Mobisoft Telesolutions Pvt. Ltd. company was being run by the petitioner. After denying the respondent her salary, the petitioner is now trying to take advantage of his own wrong by stating that now since the respondent has got her salary and therefore, the order of maintenance should be modified. Even though the company is distinct from the petitioner but the company is being run by the petitioner and it can be assumed that the salary was not being paid to the respondent only at the instance of the petitioner.
This court does not want to substitute its own conclusion to the one arrived at by the court below. It is open to the petitioner to raise all these contentions in the matrimonial proceedings pending between the husband and wife while deciding the issue of grant of alimony under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act.
Petition dismissed.
-
2021 (1) TMI 1314
Classification of services - facilitation service by appointing a facilitation manager to supervise and manage the management and maintenance of immoveable property - whether classified under ‘Real Estate Agent Services’ or ‘Real Estate Consultant Services’? - HELD THAT:- There are no reason to interfere with the impugned order.
The Civil Appeal is accordingly dismissed.
-
2021 (1) TMI 1313
Revision u/s 263 - as per CIT inadequate inquiries were made by AO on payments made to players on winnings from lotteries/crossword puzzles and taxes to be withheld thereon - As argued inadequate inquiries were made by the learned AO on payments made to players on winnings from lotteries/crossword puzzles and taxes to be withheld thereon - HELD THAT:- It has been settled by the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Amitabh Bachhan [2016 (5) TMI 493 - SUPREME COURT] that such an action is permissible to the Commissioner provided sufficient opportunity is given to the assessee.
From the records available before us and the order of learned Commissioner, it is not discernable whether proper opportunity in this regard was given to the assessee. Now, the issue is whether this is fatal to the order of revision ? Another concomitant issue is when the learned Commissioner has not given the opportunity to the assessee and has consequently not examined the assessee’s response, should the Tribunal fill-in the gap and give a finding that the Assessing Officer has duly examined the issue on the basis of document said to have been filed before Assessing Officer.
When the CIT has not examined the issue, the Tribunal should not jump ahead and examine the issue merely on the basis of document said to have been filed before the Assessing Officer without any indication as to whether the Assessing Officer has verified the correctness of the averments. That merely keeping the document on record, without carrying out necessary investigation which are per se required to verify correctness of the averment would lead to an error, in the sense that he has failed to carry out the requisite inquiry which can be rectified in revision.
Accordingly, we are of the opinion that this order of Commissioner is liable to be set aside to his file for fresh consideration as directed to examine the issue afresh after giving the assessee proper opportunity of being heard.
In giving the above said direction we draw support from the decision of Kapurchand Shrimal [1981 (8) TMI 2 - SUPREME COURT] for the proposition that it is the duty of the appellate authority to correct the errors in the orders of the authorities below and/or remit the matter for reconsideration unless prohibited by law. In this regard, we note that there is no provision in law prohibiting us to remit the matter back to the learned Commissioner on the facts and circumstances of the case.
In our considered opinion, the above submission of the assessee’s counsel is not sustainable. We do not find that the aforesaid decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court, by any stretch of imagination, proposes that matters cannot be remanded by the ITAT to the level of Commissioner of income tax. Hence, this limb of argument of the learned counsel of the assessee is rejected.
Thus we set aside this order passed under Section 263 to the file of the learned Commissione to decide the issue afresh giving the assessee proper opportunity of being heard. Appeal by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.
-
2021 (1) TMI 1312
Suspension for misconduct - misappropriation of bank's money by affording fake credits in his various accounts - HELD THAT:- The power of judicial review in the matters of disciplinary inquiries, exercised by the departmental/appellate authorities discharged by constitutional Courts Under Article 226 or Article 32 or Article 136 of the Constitution of India is circumscribed by limits of correcting errors of law or procedural errors leading to manifest injustice or violation of principles of natural justice and it is not akin to adjudication of the case on merits as an appellate authority.
It is thus settled that the power of judicial review, of the Constitutional Courts, is an evaluation of the decision-making process and not the merits of the decision itself. It is to ensure fairness in treatment and not to ensure fairness of conclusion. The Court/Tribunal may interfere in the proceedings held against the delinquent if it is, in any manner, inconsistent with the Rules of natural justice or in violation of the statutory Rules prescribing the mode of enquiry or where the conclusion or finding reached by the disciplinary authority if based on no evidence. If the conclusion or finding be such as no reasonable person would have ever reached or where the conclusions upon consideration of the evidence reached by the disciplinary authority is perverse or suffers from patent error on the face of record or based on no evidence at all, a writ of certiorari could be issued. To sum up, the scope of judicial review cannot be extended to the examination of correctness or reasonableness of a decision of authority as a matter of fact.
In the case on hand, the charge-sheet was served upon the Respondent delinquent for misappropriation of public funds by affording fake credits in his various accounts maintained at the branch where he was serving (Mumfordganj Branch) during the relevant period. In all, 7 charges were levelled against him of grave misconduct which he had committed in discharge of his official duty and after affording an opportunity of hearing to the Respondent delinquent and due compliance of the principles of natural justice, the enquiry officer in his report while dealing with the preliminary objections raised by the Respondent delinquent specifically indicated that the details of enquiry report contained 22 pages along with documents produced by the presenting officer marked as PEX-1 to PEX-28 to establish the allegations/charges levelled against the Respondent delinquent who neither produced any document nor witness in his defence.
In the case on hand, the disciplinary/appellate authority was not supposed to pass a judgment however while passing the order dated 24th July, 1999, the disciplinary authority had taken note of the record of enquiry, including self-contained enquiry report dated 22nd May, 1999 and his prima facie opinion dated 29th June, 1999 which was made available to the Respondent employee and after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing and meeting out the written objections raised by the delinquent, expressed its brief reasons in upholding the finding of guilt and penalty of dismissal by its order dated 24th July, 1999 - the finding recorded by the High Court under its impugned judgment setting aside the orders passed by the disciplinary/appellate authority, cannot be accepted, which deserves to be set aside.
The appeals deserve to succeed and are accordingly allowed and the judgment of the High Court impugned dated 13th September, 2018 is hereby set aside.
-
2021 (1) TMI 1311
Validity of reassessment orders at Anenxures-A1, A2 and A3 - seeking for quashing the demand notices at AnenxuresB1, B2 and B3 issued pursuant to the orders at AnenxuresA1, A2 and A3 - HELD THAT:- Having perused the endorsements which are not speaking orders and also deeming it necessary that the petitioner be afforded an opportunity of personal hearing before any orders are passed under Anenxures-N1, N2 and N3, endorsements at Anenxures-C1, C2 and C3 are set aside and the matters are remitted for fresh consideration on Anenxures-N1, N2 and N3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that an appeal would be filed as against the reassessment orders at Anenxures-A1, A2 and A3. However, till the disposal of the rectification applications at Anenxures-N1, N2 and N3, the respondent - Authority not to precipitate the demands raised as per the impugned demand notices at AnenxuresB1, B2 and B3.
Petition disposed off
........
|
9911796707
